Rimfire barrel length legality *help*

E

eatredmeat157

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
39   0   0
Here's my conundrum:

I was under the impression that Rimfire barrel length has no bearing on the legality of a rifle -provided that the OAL is over 26"...

Today when I called a certain manufacturer in BC, I was informed that they CANNOT make me a 4.5" barrel for a 10/22 rifle BECAUSE there is no FRT for it.

Is there any way to get one made? Even if the final rifle ends up being shorter than 26" OAL... Could I not register it as a restricted rifle?

Help please!

Thanks, -Morgan
 
Call Specialized Firearm Support Services (go through the 800 731 4000 system) and ask to have a FRT entry for a 4.5" barrelled 10/22 created.
 
A barrel is a barrel. It is not a firearm. FRT numbers are assigned to firearms, not to barrels. Apart from handgun barrels under 105mm in length, barrels are not controlled or restricted.
Just because there is no FRT number for a firearm assembled with a particular barrel, that has nothing to do with the barrel itself.
If the mfr. doesn't want to make a particular barrel, that is the mfr.'s choice.
The mfr. may be concerned about the status of a 10/22 with that barrel length, and for that reason does not want to be involved.
 
tiriaq said:
A barrel is a barrel. It is not a firearm. FRT numbers are assigned to firearms, not to barrels. Apart from handgun barrels under 105mm in length, barrels are not controlled or restricted.
Just because there is no FRT number for a firearm assembled with a particular barrel, that has nothing to do with the barrel itself.
If the mfr. doesn't want to make a particular barrel, that is the mfr.'s choice.
The mfr. may be concerned about the status of a 10/22 with that barrel length, and for that reason does not want to be involved.
Click to expand...

This is how I understand it as well.

The manufacturer I spoke with told me that since there is no FRT for a 4.5" barrel 10/22 that having one would cause the RCMP to think I had cut it down myself. And they would not make it for fear of being accused of the same thing.

I think they are wrong and I am right. The barrel itself is not breaking any laws unless it was installed and not registered
 
Well, if you want that mfr. to make a barrel, call the CFP, and get a FRT number created.
I can appreciate the mfr.'s position. If they make a barrel, put their name on it, and it turns up in an unregistered restricted firearm, it could reflect badly on them. A commercially made and marked barrel isn't going to be mistaken for a home hacksaw job.
 
Tiriaq, to have an FRT created, would I not need to have the firearm assembled for a verifier to inspect before such FRT was created? I do not understand how to accomplish this if I do not have said barrel...
 
A verifier does not create a FRT entry. A verifier can inspect the thing, create a verifiers report, and pass it along.
Try dealing direct with Ottawa. Tell them what you want to do.
I do not think that there is any way a 10/22 rebarrelled with a 4.5" barrel is going to be anything but restricted. It would be a restricted rifle, not a restricted handgun, if that matters.
 
soooooo i have a registered Ruger Charger handgun.
could i not request a 4.5" barrel for that?

it comes with a 10" barrel and i know Dlask makes a 8" (as i have one) and i know there is a company that makes a 6".

i dont understand what the issue is.
its like asking a gunsmith to replace the 6" barrel on your S&W wheel gun with a 4.5" no?

personally i cant stand the 10" barrel on my charger and i was gonna flesh out a shorter barrel for it this winter when i had time.
i had planned on going with a 6" because i know they are around but now i kinda want a 106mm one.
 
What's the difference?

I know you can put a charger barrel on a 10/22 no issues.
Is it a prohibited device to have a pistol barrel? As you all know, that is not the case.

If you build a 10/22 that is less than 26" you can register it as a restricted...

I fail to see the issue.
I fail to see the difference between a rifle and a pistol barrel for the 10/22 or charger

I have contacted another manufacturer and again I was told "they can't make anything less than 11" because that is a pistol barrel and they cannot make them"
 
wayupnorth said:
but yet you can buy a 8" from Dlask and that is made for the rifle.
that all makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Should still be just over 26" OAL with an 8", so still NR. Shorter than that and the smith runs the risk of supplying barrels that will make NR rifles restricted, with no guarantee that the buyer will call to register it as NR. No different than vendors who will not sell "80%" kits, because they don't want to be involved in a situation as the supplier who was supplying parts to build unregistered guns.
 
GD7 said:
Should still be just over 26" OAL with an 8", so still NR. Shorter than that and the smith runs the risk of supplying barrels that will make NR rifles restricted, with no guarantee that the buyer will call to register it as NR. No different than vendors who will not sell "80%" kits, because they don't want to be involved in a situation as the supplier who was supplying parts to build unregistered guns.
Click to expand...

Nothing stopping anybody from using an 8" barrel in conjunction with a folding stock.... Producing a restricted firearm
Nothing except laws on paper
 
eatredmeat157 said:
Nothing stopping anybody from using an 8" barrel in conjunction with a folding stock.... Producing a restricted firearm
Nothing except laws on paper
Click to expand...

A dealer cannot prevent every situation that could result in a restricted or prohib firearm. An 8" in conjunction with the standard LOP the vast majority of 10/22s wear is quite reasonable. Selling a barrel that is all but guaranteed to make every 10/22 restricted (4.5") would (IMO) be better to avoid. I'd bet if someone dropped their Charger off at Dlask, they'd have no problem fitting it with a shorter barrel.
 
you can put any barrel shorter than the stock ruger barrel on a 10/22 and put it on a Butler Creek folding stock and your under the min OAL.
so by the rational stated here there should be no barrels under 16.5 on the market.

while i understand that we are trying to protect people from themselves by taking away temptation i dont like it.
if a person is stupid enough to put a 4.5" barrel on a 10/22 without having the gun reclassified as a restricted gun than that is on them, let the full weight of the law come down on them and may they enjoy not being allowed to own a gun for the rest of their lives.

its a silly conversation we are having here but it does show how our society is set to the lowest common denominator.
we are only allowed stuff that the slowest of the herd can not hurt themselves with.
 
If you have a business, you have to balance the $2000 profit you might make from 4.5" 10/22 barrels against the possibility of having to pay legal costs for a vindictive legal action from Those Who Cannot Be Criticized.
 
wayupnorth said:
you can put any barrel shorter than the stock ruger barrel on a 10/22 and put it on a Butler Creek folding stock and your under the min OAL.
so by the rational stated here there should be no barrels under 16.5 on the market.
Click to expand...

Based on past actions, barrel length would not be controlled, folding stocks that allow the firearm to be discharged from a folded position would. It amazes me that the government allows us any interesting aftermarket stocks at all, as bullpup stocks (for example) are already banned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom